There's one other person the FBI targeted as aggressively as Michael Cohen

The FBI's raid on President Donald Trump's longtime
personal lawyer's home and office Monday took Washington by
storm.

There is one other known, high-profile instance in the
last year in which the FBI targeted someone in a criminal
investigation tied to Trump in the same manner: former Trump
campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

The common thread between the Cohen and Manafort raids:
investigators believed, with high confidence, that neither man
could be trusted not to conceal, destroy, or move evidence
outside the court's jurisdiction.

Three months after the Manafort raid, Mueller's office
slapped him with a 12-count indictment. He was later charged
with dozens of other financial crimes.

On Monday morning, FBI agents armed with a search warrant raided
the home and office of Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump's
longtime personal lawyer and closest confidant. They seized
documents, electronic devices, personal financial records, and
attorney-client communications, including those between Cohen and
Trump.

Ad

The raids sent shockwaves through Washington, and legal analysts
were unequivocal in emphasizing the enormity of their
implications for Cohen and Trump, both of whom could face
significant legal exposure depending on what investigators
uncover.

There is one other high-profile instance over the last year in
which the FBI went after a subject in a criminal investigation
tied to Trump with the same aggression: former Trump campaign
chairman Paul Manafort.

The FBI conducted an early-morning
raid on Manafort's Virginia home last July by knocking on his
bedroom door at the crack of dawn. They left with various
records, including tax and foreign banking documents.

Ad

Both Cohen and Manafort were cooperating with investigators at
the time of the raids, which begs the question: what prompted
such an aggressive tactic by the FBI?

According to legal experts and former federal prosecutors,
there's one explanation: investigators did not think either man
could be trusted.

"They obviously had reason to believe they could not trust Cohen
enough to subpoena him and wait for the response," said Jeffrey
Cramer, a former US attorney in Chicago who spent 12 years at the
Department of Justice. "So they just went in, and that is hugely
significant."

Harry Sandick, a former assistant US attorney from the Southern
District of New York, echoed that point.

Search warrants like the one used in the Cohen and Manafort raids
- which some legal experts characterize as a "no-knock" warrant -
are "executed early in the day and by large teams of armed
federal agents," Sandick said.

The FBI typically uses this approach in cases related to
organized crime, drug dealing, and public corruption. It is less
common in white-collar investigations unless prosecutors fear
that a subject or target may destroy, conceal, or move evidence
outside the district's jurisdiction.

Cohen has been referred to at different times as Trump's fixer,
"pit bull," and consigliere. In addition to facing legal scrutiny
for possible bank fraud and campaign finance violations, Cohen is
a subject of interest in at least four investigative threads
related to Trump.

caption

The Michael Cohen raids are said to have infuriated Trump more than any other development in the Russia probe.

Meanwhile, when the FBI asked to raid Manafort's home last year,
"Mueller and his staff may have decided that, despite the claims
of cooperation from Manafort's lawyer, Manafort could not be
trusted to provide all of the documents requested by
subpoena," wrote Harvard Law School professor
Alex Whiting, who served for a decade as a federal prosecutor
at the Department of Justice and the US Attorney's office in
Boston.

"If Mueller's team thought that there was any risk that Manafort
would hide or destroy documents, that would be a strong reason to
proceed with a search warrant," he added.

Prosecutors had to meet an even higher standard of proof in
Cohen's case, given his status as a lawyer.

The US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York,
which obtained the Cohen warrant, thought that not only was there
enough evidence to obtain such a warrant but also that there was
enough to seek attorney-client communications, such as those
between Cohen and Trump.

"That's a very fraught and extraordinary move that requires
multiple levels of authorization within the Department of
Justice," wrote former federal prosecutor Ken White. He added
that federal agents "are only supposed to raid a law firm if less
intrusive measures won't work."

Cramer noted that the US attorney's office would have had to
clear a slew of internal hurdles, which do not necessarily exist
for the average citizen, to obtain the search warrant on Cohen
before it went to a federal judge.

"So clearly, the affidavit was strong enough to warrant this kind
of action," he added.

The Cohen raid was not conducted by investigators working for
Mueller. Instead, FBI agents working for the US attorney's office
for the Southern District of New York carried out the operation
after apparently getting a referral from Mueller.

Cohen is already a subject of scrutiny in Mueller's
investigation, which is examining whether Trump or his associates
colluded with Moscow to tilt the 2016 US election in his favor.
The Southern District's role in the raid remains unclear, but
several legal analysts suggested the fact that the raid wasn't
carried out by Mueller's agents indicates Cohen is the subject of
not one, but two criminal investigations.

Three months after FBI agents raided Manafort's home last year,
Mueller indicted him on 12 counts related to money laundering,
tax fraud, conspiracy against the US, and failure to register as
a foreign agent. Manafort was later slapped with additional
charges like tax and bank fraud, all of which center around his
lobbying work in Ukraine.